9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 1039X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing, appeared before the compounding officer, accepted his guilt and offence and prayed for allowing the compounding application and also expressed his willingness to pay the compounding fees. There is no need for another show-cause notice to be issued to the petitioner or the applicant seeking compounding of an offence. Secondly, what also weighs more in the minds of this Bench is the fact that, every application for compounding of offence need not be accepted as a matter of routine. There has to be an element of scrutiny to be done and in addition there has also to be the subjective satisfaction of the compounding officer for reaching to the conclusion that the contents of the compounding application is full and true disclosure of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NANDES SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL FOR CBIC ORDER ( Per Hon'ble Sri Justice P. SAM KOSHY) The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying the Court for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ / order to quash the rejection order dated 22.01.2025 passed by respondent No.1 herein and to direct respondent No.1 to consider the petitioner's compounding application in accordance with law. 2. Heard Mr. Uzair Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (C.B.I.C.) for the respondents. 3. Vide the impugned order, the 1st respondent had rejected an application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, having found the petitioner carrying the said foreign currency with an intention to smuggle the same out of the country, proceeded to initiate proceedings against the petitioner including arrest of the petitioner. 6. Thereafter, the adjudicating authority drew up appropriate proceedings against the petitioner and a show-cause notice was also issued to the petitioner on 13.01.2017. However, the petitioner did not respond to the same nor did he participate in the adjudication proceedings that followed the show-cause notice in spite of proper service to the petitioner. Finally, the adjudicating authority, i.e., the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Hyderabad, passed the Order in Original NO.39/2017, dated 28.04.2017, ordered confiscation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rity found that the confessional statement recorded of the petitioner under Section 108 revealed a different narration of facts than the statement he subsequently made in the compounding application. The compounding officer also found that the contents of the Panchnama prepared at the time of seizure of the illegal foreign currency which the petitioner tried to smuggle out of India to be also at variance to the stand that he has taken in the compounding application. Thus, the compounding authority found that the petitioner has not made the full and true disclosure of facts while seeking for compounding of the offence and had perhaps moved the petition only with a malafide intention of evading the subsequent prosecution by the competent cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or ratio laid down in the above judgments indicate that before passing the impugned order on the compounding application, the compounding officer has to give an opportunity of hearing to the applicant so as to get satisfied as to the contents of the application for compounding being full and true disclosure of all the relevant facts. Further, the said judgments do not prescribe that the adjudicating officer has to give a notice of hearing before passing the impugned order, and to disclose his intention and of rejection of the compounding application before passing the impugned order. 12. In the instant case, after the applicant had submitted his application, the application was first got scrutinized by the compounding officer within the D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the application for compounding of the offence. Surprisingly, there has been no statement available on record to show that the petitioner had retracted from the statement that he had given under Section 108 as also in the Panchnama. Moreover, with the said statement under Section 108, the petitioner has accepted the Order in Original and has also paid the penalty imposed. In the said circumstances, if the compounding officer found substantial variance in the statements so made by the petitioner, the rejection of the compounding application cannot be held to be bad in law or being contrary to the circulars governing the field of determining the compounding application. 15. Therefore, for all the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
